Skip to content

Conversation

@bou3108
Copy link
Collaborator

@bou3108 bou3108 commented Jul 16, 2024

No inheritance, no wrapper, just to check the rendering

No inheritance, no wrapper, just to check the rendering
@romainfd romainfd added the WIP Work In Progress: the branch is still under active development and not stable / in a working state label Jul 16, 2024
@github-actions
Copy link

There is no coverage information present for the Files changed

Total Project Coverage 65.46% 🍏

@romainfd romainfd changed the title add initial module : Health (RS-EDA) [Ruby] Add initial module: createCaseHealth (RS-EDA) Jul 16, 2024
@github-actions
Copy link

There is no coverage information present for the Files changed

Total Project Coverage 65.46% 🍏

@github-actions
Copy link

There is no coverage information present for the Files changed

Total Project Coverage 65.46% 🍏

1 similar comment
@github-actions
Copy link

There is no coverage information present for the Files changed

Total Project Coverage 65.46% 🍏

Copy link
Contributor

@romainfd romainfd left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Super premier jet !
A suivre donc après les tests côté BISOM !
D'après la doc OpenAPI, j'ai quand même l'impression que c'est plutôt l'approche ruby et non ruby_on_rails qui est plus pertinente parce qu'en ruby ça génère un client alors qu'en ruby_on_rails, ça génère un serveur. Vu qu'on utilise que le modèle, ça ne devrait pas faire de grosse différence mais j'ai l'impression que côté ruby_on_rails, il s'appuie sur la base de données (< ApplicationRecord) pour déterminer les champs des différents objets alors que rien ne permet de générer automatiquement cette dernière... Après, il y a bien un paramètre pour le DB adapter mais je ne sais pas si c'est suffisant. Et a priori, côté BISOM, l'objectif n'est pas d'avoir notre modèle en base de données mais plutôt le votre...

Comment on lines 16 to 17
"openApiNullable": true,
"supportUrlQuery": false
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Pas sûr que ces propriétés soient supportées : https://openapi-generator.tech/docs/generators/ruby/#config-options

Comment on lines 14 to 17
"moduleName": "Com::Hubsante::Model::Health",
"gemName": "hubsante-model-create-case-health",
"openApiNullable": true,
"supportUrlQuery": false
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Pas sûr que ces propriétés soient supportées -> https://openapi-generator.tech/docs/generators/ruby-on-rails/#config-options

Comment on lines +16 to +19
- [x] config : les fichiers de configuration du générateur Java, périmètre par périmètre
- [x] input : les descripteurs OpenAPI générés préalablement
- [x] classes : les classes Java générés (ce répertoire n'est pas forcément visible, car déplacé dans le code source à la fin de la github action)
- [x] templates : des templates mustache additionnels pour les classes Java. Par défaut, le générateur utilise ses propres templates, accessibles sur Github; il est possible de les surcharger via des templates locaux, comme ici.
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Il faudra penser à le reprendre lors de la tâche de rationalisation de la config OpenAPI, j'ai mis à jour la tâche https://app.asana.com/0/1203993034002721/1207587496958408

@github-actions
Copy link

There is no coverage information present for the Files changed

Total Project Coverage 67.13% 🍏

1 similar comment
@github-actions
Copy link

There is no coverage information present for the Files changed

Total Project Coverage 67.13% 🍏

@github-actions
Copy link

There is no coverage information present for the Files changed

Total Project Coverage 67.13% 🍏

@github-actions
Copy link

There is no coverage information present for the Files changed

Total Project Coverage 67.13% 🍏

2 similar comments
@github-actions
Copy link

There is no coverage information present for the Files changed

Total Project Coverage 67.13% 🍏

@github-actions
Copy link

There is no coverage information present for the Files changed

Total Project Coverage 67.13% 🍏

@github-actions
Copy link

There is no coverage information present for the Files changed

Total Project Coverage 67.13% 🍏

1 similar comment
@github-actions
Copy link

There is no coverage information present for the Files changed

Total Project Coverage 67.13% 🍏

@github-actions
Copy link

There is no coverage information present for the Files changed

Total Project Coverage 67.13% 🍏

@github-actions
Copy link

github-actions bot commented Oct 1, 2024

There is no coverage information present for the Files changed

Total Project Coverage 68.52% 🍏

@romainfd romainfd changed the base branch from develop to main October 1, 2024 13:26
@github-actions
Copy link

github-actions bot commented Oct 1, 2024

There is no coverage information present for the Files changed

Total Project Coverage 70.22% 🍏

@sonarqubecloud
Copy link

sonarqubecloud bot commented Oct 9, 2024

@github-actions
Copy link

github-actions bot commented Oct 9, 2024

There is no coverage information present for the Files changed

Total Project Coverage 70.22% 🍏

@github-actions
Copy link

There is no coverage information present for the Files changed

Total Project Coverage 66.45% 🍏

@github-actions
Copy link

There is no coverage information present for the Files changed

Total Project Coverage 66.45% 🍏

@romainfd romainfd changed the base branch from main to feature/mdd/automatic-schema-generation November 29, 2024 14:28
Base automatically changed from feature/mdd/automatic-schema-generation to auto/model_tracker December 16, 2024 16:41
@sonarqubecloud
Copy link

@romainfd romainfd changed the base branch from auto/model_tracker to develop December 23, 2024 16:23
@romainfd
Copy link
Contributor

Closed in favor of #218 leveraging auto schema generation and cleaner packages

@romainfd romainfd closed this Dec 24, 2024
@romainfd romainfd deleted the feature/ruby-lib branch December 24, 2024 10:39
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

WIP Work In Progress: the branch is still under active development and not stable / in a working state

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants